Skip to main content
2:25 am
it all back together after you see how the sausage is made. that you still believe that it is all worthwhile. [applause] >> of course, next week, we will be celebrating the 150th anniversary of the gettysburg address. i do not know if you have some final thoughts on what lincoln's words meant to the country than and what they mean to us now. >> first of all, i would like to thank you and i would like to thank you all for staying so late. [applause] very briefly, lincoln's words mean a lot to me personally because he was a great emancipator. i happen to be from the slaves that were affected after the emancipation proclamation. also, i have to say that what lincoln had to say and what he
2:26 am
did has affected our country enormously. we know that. but it has affected me too. no 13th amendment, no 14th amendment, no 15th amendment, my life would be different. i would not be sitting here. but in his speech, you hear this voice. it is perfectible. the country is perfectible. not perfect, but perfectible. this great war was all about that. when i go into the building that i work in now, that is the theme i tried to carry with me and my clerks. it is perfectible. it is worth, every day, getting up and trying to make it right, trying to make it work. but you cannot do that if you do not do it on principle. it is not necessarily just about your methodology, this or that.
2:27 am
it is about whether or not your principles are right and they are the principles of this country. i thank you all, i thank you for this opportunity and god bless you. [applause] >> thank you, judge sykes and justice thomas. thank you, in particular, justice thomas, for sharing many
2:28 am
of the lessons that you learned in that life well-lived. for those of us younger than me, who will be the future of this country, we appreciate your sense of calling and commitment to that calling to help perfect our union and to do it without hatred for those who oppose us and with cheerfulness. thank you again for your service and your lessons. here is some of the phone
2:29 am
conversation with reporters. times, this is the measure of how quickly we respond to user requests. you can see from the bar on the left-hand side that the average response time on was running around eight seconds , which is clearly unacceptable and very frustrating for consumers. driven by the software and hardware fixes, we now have much faster response times. graph here shows andage response time by day you can see the average response time has been well under one second, which means consumers are having a much faster, smoother experience on the site. the chart on the bottom of page error rates,tem another key operating metrics.
2:30 am
this is a measure of how often per page basis the system times out or presents an error message. you can see the progress the team has made. the bar at the far left shows where we were in late october, with an error rate of approximately six percent. we got that down to two percent 9, 21% by november 16 and this past friday the average error rate was approximately 0.75 or three quarters of one percent. in addition to improving system speed and improving error rates, we made measurable progress in increasing the systems stability . stability, which is typically referred to as system uptime, is measured by the percent of time the site is available on a given day, excluding planned downtime for
2:31 am
scheduled maintenance. system is seeing uptime persistently above 90%. you can see the system uptime ending november 2 was only 42.9%. think the system average do most of october as well. the uptime improved to 79.1% by november 9 and has been consistently above 90% and then. 95% uptime this past week. this is driven by the hardware and software fixes and we expect to see further improvements given the redundancy and capacity we have added to the system. just as importantly, when we do experience system glitches or slow downs, we can resolve it
2:32 am
issues much more quickly due to monitoring and rapid response teams. back in october, the typical system outage lasted several hours or more. now the team can make the necessary fixes within 60 minutes. we have a much more stable system that is reliably open for business. that is important, because at the end of the day we need high consumers areso able to use the system to seek information, fill out applications, shop and enroll. >> c-span, we bring public affairs of ants from washington directly to you, putting you directly in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences and offering complete apple to gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the tv funded bystry and
2:33 am
your local cable and satellite provider. now you can watch us in hd. political strategist and cnn contributor on the future of the republican party. she talks about how changing demographics may affect the party in future elections. her remarks come at the new hampshire institute of politics at saint anselm college in manchester. [applause] >> meghann said she was thinking of brushing up on her spanish to do the introduction. she didn't want to offend me and i said i don't get easily offended. i know george w. bush. the butchering of spanish doesn't offend me very much. thank you for being here. well, neil was just telling me this is the third event today.
2:34 am
it seems you guys are busy. i want to thank you. i want to thank you for inviting me to new hampshire. new hampshire has a very special place in my heart. first of all, i am a mccainiac. winning the primary here was one of the highlights of the campaign. second of all, i happen to love your national committee man, who has the coolest socks of any republican committee man. third of all, because i think you have the baddest state slogan in the entire nation. i thought we would have a conversation today about where the republican party is. i'm not here to give you a history lesson and give you statistics. this is the birthplace of politics. you know all of that.
2:35 am
i want to talk big picture and my impressions. the party is in flux. we are reeling from two consecutive losses. we have lost two quests for the white house. the gop has become the party of the gap. we have a gap with women voters. we have a gap with latino voters. a gap with asian voters prayed -- we have a cap with gay voters. we have so many gaps that was -- we have so many gaps that the clothing company should sue was -- should sue us for copyright infringement. as it comes to elections and how to win elections, one group thinks that republicans need to get more of the base out. another group that i belong to thinks that what we have to do is grow the base. we cannot just rely on traditional republican voters.
2:36 am
what i believe is that old, straight, white, male voters ain't what they used to be. don't get me wrong, i love old, straight, white males. i am married to one. i am friends with them. i have even voted for several. they are not winning elections these days. and that is a reality. the demographic trends are not swinging in their favor. demography matters in politics. that is what jeb bush said when i was with him. mitt romney got 27% of the latino vote. the percentage of latino voters is increasing and the percentage of white voters is decreasing. i know that can be scary to some people. let me give you the good news and bad news. the bad news is that we have you surrounded. the good news is, we come in peace. it will be very hard for any candidate to get into the white house without a decent showing
2:37 am
of latino vote. and no, 27 percent is not a decent showing. republicans need to win back some of that if we ever expect to go back inside the white house. i have been inside the white house. the inside of the white house is nicer than the outside. republicans not only have to motivate the base. we have to grow the base. republicans need to make the tent bigger or we will soon find ourselves standing under an umbrella. i'm a woman. i'm an immigrant. i am hispanic. i don't qualify for aarp membership yet. and i am a republican. i am an endangered species right sadly now. , i often get asked how can you possibly be a republican? why are you a republican? the explanation lies in my personal history. my family story shapes my views. i came here in 1980. i was born in nicaragua. there was a communist revolution. the sandinistas came to power in 1979 after a three-year bloody
2:38 am
civil war. it turned out the sandinistas were also communists. they quickly went about creating communism in our little country. my parents were not fans of repression or censorship or redistribution of wealth at that point they made the decision of getting out of nicaragua. my father stayed behind and became a contra, a nicaraguan freedom fighter. when your father is struggling to bring freedom back to your country, you realize at an early age that politics matters. election results matter. being a bystander is not an option. being involved is what you must do. i became a republican the night i heard ronald reagan addressing trying to win support for aids to support nicaraguan freedom fighters. when you hear the president the united states of america at a state of the union address
2:39 am
support and defend the right of your home country to be free, that pretty much seals the deal about what party you're going to belong to for the rest of your life. that is why i became a republican before i knew what one was. i stayed republican because i believe in smaller government. i believe in entrepreneurship. i believe in american exceptionalism. i believe in a strong america internationally. i have remained a republican as well because i live in miami. i have lived in miami for 33 years. there, i'm represented by folks like jeb bush. were you an intern? [inaudible] if any of you ever want an internship, she is the best at that. republicans in florida, especially south florida,
2:40 am
understand that if you want to win, you have to embrace diversity and understand it. you have to represented. -- you have to represent it. i'm a proud republican. no qualifiers. no labels. no subcategories. i don't want to be called a tea party republican. a moderate publican. a conservative republican, a moss-covered republican. a libertarian republican. i don't want to be told by my party who have appointed themselves the republican purity police that i do not along. -- that i do not belong. i do not want to be called a rhino. actually, i have changed my mind on that go ahead and call me a , rhino. for me that stands for republican that is inclusive not obstructionist. i just want to be a republican and focus on the things we agree on as a party. not the things we disagree on. i do not want to wage fights
2:41 am
against republicans that can win in their individual districts and states. call me crazy, but i would rather use our resources and energy beating democrats, not other republicans. mike lee can win utah. but he probably cannot win in new hampshire. chris christie can win in new jersey. but he would have a hard time winning in alabama. i do not care how many times ted cruz hugs barack obama. i do not think he can win the majority of the latino vote, the women vote, in new jersey. i want to win elections. that requires fielding candidates that can win. fielding candidates that fit the population priorities of where they are running. a winning republican candidate with whom i agree part of the time is a hell of a lot better than a losing candidate because with whom i agree all the time. because this is new hampshire, i
2:42 am
want to make an aside here. ayotte is a winning republican candidate. she is an even she is a better that her senator. senator. she is thoughtful. she is courageous. she has guts. she worries about priorities in new hampshire. not republican primaries. as ted cruz and the senate conservatives found out, do not tread on kelly ayotte, she bites back. if you asked what the biggest problems the party faces, there are many issues. the most harmful one is the perception that we are intolerant to those who think differently. often in our own party. we have to reflect the diversity of thought. it is ok for republicans to disagree on issues. to disagree on tactics. as long as we agree on values. you may not know it from watching cable tv or listening to talk radio, but not all republicans oppose gay marriage. not all republicans oppose immigration reform.
2:43 am
i want to talk more detail about immigration reform. we must pass it. because the system is broken. not doing anything is endorsing the status quo. we must pass it because it makes economic sense. it makes national security sense. and yes, it makes political sense. of hispanics will tell you the same thing. immigration is not a priority issue for hispanic voters. sometimes it is not even in the top five. what it is an emotional issue. it is a gateway issue. too often the immigration debate turns hostile and ugly. too often it sounds like there are some folks who don't want us in this country. unfortunately, more often than not, they are members of my party. let me assure you, my -- are not the size of
2:44 am
cantaloupes. if they think you do not like them, do want them to be members of the club, and a likelihood they won't like you back and will let you -- and will not elect you. on election night 2012, i said on cnn mitt romney self deported , from the white house. he did so during the republican primaries. where are we on immigration reform? we have 11 million undocumented in a nutshellwe have 11 million undocumented immigrants in , the united states. we weational people agree should not round them up and them en masse. most rational people agree that we do not want to be left picking our own produce, cutting our own hair, operating our own hearts and brains. most rational people believe we need to secure our borders, attract and keep talented foreign students and workers. not offer blank check amnesty. not punish kids for the actions of their parents. and put tough but fair
2:45 am
requirements in place as a condition to earning legal status. most rational people approve a eventual path to legalization with or without citizenship. you must be asking yourself, how come we can't get anything done? the answer is simple. there is a lot of irrational people making our laws and running our government. fortunately, believe it or not, i think it seems harder to believe some days, there are still rational people left in washington. and fortunately, some of them happen to be in republican leadership. i have spoken to john boehner. he wants to immigration done. he has to find a way to do it so that it passes muster in the house. sometimes that is mutually exclusive. it is not an easy needle to thread. i think it is premature to say that immigration reform is dead.
2:46 am
it is not going to happen this year. but i keep hope alive that it may make a recovery and wake up from its, sometime spring of sometime incoma spring of next year. we will see. if we get immigration reform done and on the table, then republicans can talk to hispanics and other minority groups about other issues that are a priority to us. too often i hear folks say that if we pass immigration reform, we will be creating 11 million new democrats. the people who espouse this theory have one thing in common. not one of them is hispanic. there are other things. hispanics know and understand that we are not one big monolithic block. hispanics are not going to vote republican because we pass immigration reform. the republican party will have to fight for the heart and soul and vote of immigrants. i do know that the way to lose voters for sure is to assume you can never win them, and never make an effort.
2:47 am
there are other things the gop needs to do to broaden the base. for starters, every male republican candidate needs to be given a biology class on a woman's reproductive system. the republican platform should include a clause whereby any republican candidate utters the word rape at anything other than -- as anything other than a violent act against an individual, that individual will be cut into pieces and thrown into a tank of hungry sharks. enough of this. part of the reason this happens is because there are not enough women elected as republicans. if there were, i have to believe it would make a difference on how all republicans would talk to, talk with, and talk about women. it is time for the temperate voices in the party to make themselves heard.
2:48 am
if one elected republican says something stupid, something offensive, there should be 10 republicans that immediately repudiate the statements and making clear they are not representative of the entire party. we cannot just be lukewarm about it. it is not ok to say that is not the language i would have used. we have to call stupid, stupid. we have to change our tone on so many issues, not just women's issues. this includes issues like gay rights. we have begun to change on gay rights. a few days ago the senate voted , on a bill ending discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. it passed with 10 republican votes. 50% of republicans under 44 years old support marriage equality. i support gay marriage because i think it is consistent with republican values. if we are the party of personal freedom, that includes the freedom to marry whomever you want. if we are the party of states
2:49 am
rights, that means we have to respect states like new hampshire who choose to give their gay citizens the right to marry. if we are the party that wants less abortions and more adoptions, we can't stand in the way of a loving gay couple who wants to adopt a child who is the custody of the state. i feel this way, i didn't need to evolve. i have many gay friends. i cannot reconcile telling somebody i love and respect that i love and respect them, but i think they are entitled to less rights than i am because they have a different sexual orientation. i cannot reconcile that. i also think we have to start being the party of ideas again. we have to offer solutions. we have two propose alternatives. we cannot be the party of no. i do not want to sound negative about the gop. i can get frustrated,, but i
2:50 am
rarely get discouraged. there are candidates out there who can be game changers. who can change the debate and tell him. who can change the message. reach out beyond traditional voters. go seek votes in places where republicans have stopped going. chris christie do in a blue state. jeb bush did it in a purple state. susana martinez is doing in a swing state. this is not mission impossible. but we have got to want to do it we cannot just think about doing . it. the democrats were stuck in a similar rut from carter and till until about 1992 when clinton came along. he brought energy, ideas, and a positive outlook. he told us not to stop thinking about tomorrow. it took democrats three elections to get their groove back.
2:51 am
12 years of painful losses and being out in the wilderness. for them to get past internal differences and find a candidate they could unite behind. i am hoping it takes just two losses. with that positive note, i would like to open it up to questions. [indiscernible] >> hi. one criticism i have been hearing about why you are seeing so many candidates who can't reach across the aisle, who can't appeal outside of their own demographics is because of gerrymandering. you have these ultrasafe carzily drawn districts.
2:52 am
you do not need to be more inclusive candidate to win. do you agree with that? do you think the republican party should get behind initiatives to have more nonpartisan districts? >> yes, i agree with that. i think gerrymandering has a lot to do with where we are right now. that is not just a problem for republicans. it is a problem for democrats. it has just become more visible for republicans lately. there are going to be some states where republicans get behind initiatives. there can be somewhere they don't. all politics is local. people like safe districts. it is a hard argument to make. i think the courts are going to decide in some cases, in some states. i also think that we have to look for candidates who are big thinkers. not just small thinkers. who can think about the greater good, not just their own good.
2:53 am
that frankly happens in primaries. i think primaries are where a lot of the problems are happening. but definitely gerrymandering has contributed to these problems. amongst many others. cable tv is contributing. it has become a very polarizing force in american politics. first, sure which comes the polarizing force too often, or the politics. i do know that what we see from republicans on tv is republicans that say crazy colorful things because they are quotable. it turns into further press. i have had times where i was booked on a sunday show, and it
2:54 am
was the week of the decision on gay marriage. i got a call from a tv booker about friday asking me where i was on gay marriage. i said i'm supportive of gay marriage. she called me back 15 minutes later and said we are going to go in another direction. we want somebody that is against it. that person can get into a fight with hillary rosen. that is what makes ratings. we all complain as viewers that we do not like polarization. but that is what we watch. i think that we have the power to change it. we just have to realize we have that power. we have to do it. >> hi. you talk about how there are these divisions of the republican party.
2:55 am
the tea party, moderates, radicals. do you ever talk about -- the changes you would like to see happen, are you worried that bringing changes in is going to create more, to divide us more? >> i have a hard time imagining that we could be even more divided than we are now. i shouldn't say that. because i shouldn't say that. but -- no, i do not think broadening the base could divide us more. i think broadening the base can win elections. you know, it's a funny thing about winning elections, they are really therapeutic when it comes to healing divisions and friction.
2:56 am
we are going to endure this growing pain, healthy debate, insanity. whatever you want to terminate. we are going to have to endure for the next year and a half, two years, the glass we have a until we have a nominee that sets the tone. i hope it is a nominee that sets the tone of uniting us, and yang and uniting the country behind the public and ideas. i hope it is a nominee that -- behind republican ideas. i hope it is a nominee that believes in the power of persuasion, not the power of anger. we are going to have to plow through. i don't see how getting more people in is more divisive. i think getting people out is divisive. i do not think we have the luxury. some people talk about should the tea party breakaway from the republican party -- we are not winning elections.
2:57 am
to me the winning formula to winning elections is an coming too small a party it is building , a bigger party. >> thank you for your talk. i'm a professor of theology here. i have a question for you. >> you think republicans need prayer? >> the republicans have a lot to offer. i want to ask you about jon huntsman. i'm going to admit that i'm a democrat. i tend to vote democratic. but i saw what jon huntsman had to offer and i'm pretty sure nine times out of 10, if he were the candidate, he would've had my vote. he is a man with sense, a big- tent vision. he is able to reach out to people. i know that you already know this. you were on his team.
2:58 am
what do you think, what kind of concrete strategies would you suggest for getting a candidate like huntsman, getting a chance to have a shot beyond a little bit into the primary? this is really important. from the perspective of a because againfrom the perspective of a, moderate that is the candidate they latina, a woman you need. , why is it so hard to get a guy like him into play? >> well, it is too bad the republican primary isn't held in universities. there are a lot of jon huntsman fans in universities. i think jon huntsman is a great guy.
2:59 am
i chose to support him because ideologically, he was the one out of the field that i agree the most with. sometimes very good people, who might even be good governing, don't make the best candidates. i have to tell you. he wasn't too fond of fundraising. it is terrible to be asking people for money all of the time. it is one of the worst parts of politics. it is a necessary evil. he just didn't cut through. i also think john, who i respect and like, has a tremendous family. but i think john has become a nonfactor in the republican party.
3:00 am
and the democrat party. just to give you an example, last year, chris christie wasn't invited to tea pack -- tpac. -- to cpac. that was fodder for days. wasn't invited. jon was invited and no one noticed. somehow, even though people like jeb bush and bobby jindal, like chris christie have been critical of the republican party, particularly in washington, a somehow managed to do it from within the tent. i can't put my finger on why that doesn't translate the same way. i would like to see him be a
3:01 am
bigger factor than what he is. but, really, outside of moderate democrats like you in academia, the jon huntsman contingency is small. >> hello. i'm a chairman of the college republicans. >> i know who you are. >> i retweet you. >> i am happy to see you look normal. you have a twitter fascination with me. >> i agree with you so much i can't help it. i was an intern on jon huntsman's campaign i agree with your analysis on him. i just wanted to say thank you
3:02 am
for having the guts to call out stupid as you see it. i actually was honored to sign on to the amicus brief, the supreme court that you joined onto. they key for being one of the sane voices. for giving me hope that there is a bright future ahead for our party. i do have two questions regarding that. what would you say about obama care? i asked because while generally we were universally against it, i do think that lately our town has been sounding like a witchhunt. everyone thinks they will be a winning issue. i'm not so convinced just yet. i'm curious about your thoughts on that. secondly, i was curious about what you think the gop civil war. i have been told to tone it
3:03 am
down, be friendly. show an image of you making -- >> who is telling you this? >> the party. we want to make sure that we look healthy. >> live free or die. [laughter] >> amen to that. >> on your second question, i'm not too fond of the term civil war when it comes to what is going on in the republican party. maybe because i lived through one. one of the things that i really hate that is happening in politics, and political commentating today, trivializing of words like hostage, civil war. to me those things mean
3:04 am
something. we have to make an effort to tone down and be more temperate voices, and use more rational qualifiers to describe what is going on. that is part of the problem. i do not see it as a civil war. i see it as what happens when a party is out of power, and there isn't one unifying voice. as i ask you guys right now, who is the leader of the republican party today? >> boehner? >> is my friend.
3:05 am
i will tell him that he has one person who thinks he is the leader. >> [inaudible] >> it isn't john boehner. he has no control over his caucus. even in the senate, you look at ted cruz. he was --it is so loose. i would say chris christie. >> if i went around this room and i asked everybody who their leader is, either we get no answer, or 40 different answers. when you do not have somebody that sets the standards, this happens. people start talking. you start sounding dysfunctional. that is happening to republicans. it hasn't happened to democrats because they have a president in the white house. there is no bigger bully pulpit than the presidency. frankly, he keeps them in line.
3:06 am
when the progressive democrats want to go off the reservation, they have ways of keeping them in line. all sorts of things. i think that is one of the problems we are having. i think it is a result of being out of the white house for this long. they are not being one identifiable leader. there is not somebody today that is the likely nominee. it is an open field. we are going to duke it out. this is what it is going to be like for the next year, year and a half. i do think there is a change in the last month as a result of the shutdown. for about a last two years --
3:07 am
the last two years of republicans without qualifiers, we kind of looked the other way when this group was doing its own thing. i think the government shutdown was the straw that broke the camels back. you saw it in the senate. they said, stop racing money against me. that opened the floodgates. then all the other one started piling on and asking the same questions. for the last few weeks there has been merciful silence from the more a survey part of the party. i think everyone is involved.
3:08 am
i think you are going to see more of a concerted effort financially, structurally, in the media, and it is a way of not just eating defined by one very vocal group -- not just being defined by one vocal group. they go out in the cold and rain. it takes a lot to get me to protest these days. i think this has been good. on your first question about obamacare, the best thing to happen to obamacare was the government shutdown. i remember asking a guy who was
3:09 am
defending it about two and a half weeks in when we finally started talking about the website and all the problems -- remember there were glitches. i said when can we start calling these glitches a debacle? he said by the middle of november if the website is not finished. today is november 19. it is a tremendous debacle. it's not just the website. it's incredible that the greatest country in the world
3:10 am
has spent hundreds of millions of dollars loving a website, -- building a website, and the thing doesn't work. i am tired of hearing excuses that it is going to work by november 30, when it likely is not. there is more than the website. the website is the least of their problems. it is perhaps most embarrassing. in life you get one chance to make a first impression. that is the first impression you made. we are seeing democrats like diane feinstein getting behind efforts on policy, on issues like the cancellation of policies, and that isn't going to go away.
3:11 am
that is going to get more complicated, because the mandate comes into affect. there are a lot of small and midsized businesses. we own hotels. business people are looking at paying the fine, canceling the policies, and putting the employees on the exchanges. i think we have to show self- restraint, so self disciplined. this is painful for the entire country. i think we need to come to terms with the fact there are aspects
3:12 am
of obamacare the american people like. >> repeal, replace. i get worried when i hear those words. >> the smartest thing we can do is start formulating positive alternatives, showing that republican solution is better than a plan passed by one party. thank you. >> let me just say senator john mccain is the reason i became a republican, and he is the man i would most like to see be president today. >> you know he is cranky. >> i wouldn't want to be on his bad side. >> if john mccain was in the white house and spent hundreds
3:13 am
of millions of dollars building a website, and it didn't work. he may not know how to turn on a computer, but somebody's head would have rolled, literally. >> most definitely. i agree with 80% of what you have said today. i think we are glossing over when it comes to the issue of redefining marriage. we are not -- if we redefined it would that not explicitly changed two realities such as gender differentiation and procreation?
3:14 am
>> i'm having a hard time understanding what you are asking. >> less likely to have husbands and wives and children. >> you are saying gay marriage would -- >> the stability of the gay marriage. >> you have had gay marriage for a couple years now. how is it going? are a bunch of straight people turning gay or leaving their wives and husbands because gay people are getting married? >> i think 41% of children are born out of wedlock, and typically when someone endorses that view, according to polls, when people view a redefined image of mary they are less likely to see children important. the generational gap shows up
3:15 am
with children as well. i understand there are legalities that help people who domestically depend upon each other to help them out. i think that could help with civil unions, but would not redefining marriage help in such a way? >> where are you from? >> syracuse, new york. >> it is legal there. you can move to alabama. >> certainly there is a social cost. >> your question is a serious question. first, when we talk about traditional marriage, what is traditional marriage nowadays? over 50% of marriages end in divorce. so many live in blended families, second wives, second husbands, kids blending with kids from that family.
3:16 am
the only difference between gay couples and straight couples is that gay couples can't get pregnant by accident. the vast majority of gay people who end up having children or adopting children or doing whatever they have to do, really have to work at it. it cost them a lot of money. many times gay couples have adopted children with disabilities, with problems. i have a friend who adopted to crack babies. it's a complicated issue, because it involves religion and social taboos. in my mind, sexuality is not equivalent to morality. i think if we are going to allow somebody to adopt a child or
3:17 am
have a child, where you go through some scrutiny, gay people need to go through the same scrutiny as straight people on whether they are fit to be adoptive parents, but i think their sexuality does not make them unfit. i don't see -- i don't see a connection between gay people being married as a threat to marriage. i would argue the people who most want to get married right now our gay people. most straight people are waiting well into their 30's and even 40's to get married, have children if they do so at all. part of the reason we need immigration is because our fertility has fallen, because we are not having children up the same rate we used to.
3:18 am
i think we have to come to terms with the fact that traditional marriage is not what it used to be when june cleaver was around. the bottom line is this. i am being pragmatic. gay marriage, gay rights, that train left the station. by the end of this year there is going to be 17 states in the district -- and the district of columbia that allow gay marriage. it's very hard to take away rights once you have given them. it's easy not to give them in the first place. we are going to see what it means in terms of the family and marriage and the sanctity of marriage and all that. i agree you cannot force a religion. the reality today is there are
3:19 am
going to be probably 17 states by the end of this year -- we are waiting for the illinois ought to get signed and new mexico to be decided, but there could be up to 17 states by the end of this year and the next several months that have gay marriage. that number is going to grow. this debate is on the brink of becoming moot. >> surely there are some social costs. if we look at countries such as the netherlands and sweden, cohabitation is getting greater. >> is that because of gay marriage? >> i think so. >> it's because straight people don't want to get married. >> i think we've made it into a quaint social custom. i think our policy would be
3:20 am
better served strengthening marriage. >> how does gay marriage we can marriage -- weaken marriage? >> by redefining marriage you associate it with decades of discrimination. often you marginalize those people who hold marriage to a strong standard. >> you are saying because gay marriage -- because gay people can't get married marriages trivialized and not as legitimate, and i am going to the marginalized and abstain from marriage? i am going to boycott marriage because gays are getting married? >> i think it changes what marriage is. >> give it a couple years. we are going to have statistics
3:21 am
and a couple years. there are 17 states. if all of a sudden you see a bunch of straight people are divorcing because of gay marriage, and it is on the form, reason of marriages going to be because i am protesting because of gay marriage, then i will agree with you. until then, i am sticking to my erie. >> would it not dilute areas if we relegate it to a social contract? >> it is a social contract. if you are an atheist, what the hell is it? it's not a contract? >> i think it should be more than a contract. >> have you heard pope francis on this stuff lately?
3:22 am
surely if the catholic church can shift a little -- >> it's not shifting. he's just using a different tone. by fighting the catholic church has shifted tremendously, not just on gay marriage but in general -- i think the catholic church has shifted tremendously, not just on gay marriage but in general. i think it shows you what one person can do when they choose to lead, when they choose to stop being judgmental, and when they lead by example and they lead with love, not with judgment. >> we have got two more. >> thank you for coming. you are involved in strategies and stuff, right? >> losing ones.
3:23 am
i really want to be in the winning campaign, you know. no more nondrinking candidates? -- nondrinking candidates. >> i think last election there was a lot of focus on issues. i think one of the major reasons why obama won was because there were constantly saying, they are gay haters. they are anti-women because they think abortion is wrong. how do we move away from that? i am cuban, and communism is a bad idea. how do you get other hispanics to see that? how do you get them to actually look at the issues instead of being taken away -- taken in by we are going to take care of
3:24 am
you? had you get them to see those issues and not so much focus on what democrats are telling them? >> i don't think it's a fair assessment. i don't think it's a fair assessment to think the hispanics didn't vote for romney and voted for obama because they thought they were going to get something. if you think about the money invested, the micro-targeting that the obama campaign did, mitt romney admitted he thinks one of his biggest problems is
3:25 am
not investing enough in hispanic outreach and hispanic media. what the obama campaign did mitt oneey himself has admitted of his biggest problem was not investing in hispanic outrage. there was nothing for him there. there was a point in the 2012 ,lection where hispanic voters latino voters were very angry with obama. specific promise on
3:26 am
immigration. latino voters were very disillusioned. for latinos, our word is our bond. word of honor. he broke it. you cannot gloss over it. voters who were ready to run away from obama, we did not give them anywhere to run to. where were they going to run to? the guy who was espousing self deportation? the guy who was hanging out with an offer -- author of an anti- latino vote? if you look at the romney campaign, and i have stopped wanting to talk about it because after a lot of shock therapy, i've tried to forget it. [laughter] it almost seemed to me like they made a calculation that they could get a very low, 29% of the
3:27 am
hispanic vote, and still win. if they got enough of the white vote out. they just ignored the hispanic vote. rule number 12 winning votes is asking people to go. it is making the case. it is persuading people to be on your side. it is showing people that you can relate. timeromney had a hard relating to white people. imagine relating to us. think -- i don't think -- i don't agree with your assessment that hispanics voted for obama because they would be given things. personal,at is underestimating hispanics. and their thought process.
3:28 am
it is not recognizing that frankly they did a better job campaign lies on micro- targeting. -- campaign wise on micro- targeting. and he did a better job on seeking the vote. that is not how we win hispanic votes. by -- itspanic votes is not possible to do. ago, george w. bush won 44% of the hispanic vote. any president who could win 44% the hispanic vote today would win. it is not possible to do. it requires a candidate -- chris christie just did it. he won 51% of the hispanic vote in new jersey. a blue state. he put money into it. he spent time on it. alas events of the campaign was in new york city.
3:29 am
it was in a heavily hispanic area. bakeryat every hispanic in the state of new jersey. he made it a priority. it was a priority from day one. when he brings to the table is the fact that he can get, that he can increase the base. that he can get crossover voters. he needed to prove that he did. he made it a priority. the romney did not. do not blame hispanics. question, final question, would be that tonight you've talked a lot about what the republican party needs. you are saying that white men are not with they used to be. you touched on chris christie and what he did to appeal to the republican party and the hispanic vote. think, in your opinion, could be the candidate
3:30 am
to aing everyone back republican party in the white house. >> i'm jaded and biased. he is my friend. i know him. i love him. he speaks beautiful spanish. i think the best candidate in the field is jeb bush. i think -- a sickly this election cycle, i am like a plus size men's store. i'd either go in big or tall. if the tall guy does not take me to the prom, i am going with the big guy. jed is bicultural. he is not just bilingual, he is by cultural -- bicultural. we would consider him hate hispanic. give the game changer when it comes to the has anecdote. -- hispanic vote. he has

Future of the Republican Party
CSPAN December 2, 2013 2:25am-3:31am EST

Series/Special. Ana Navarro discusses the future of the Republican Party. (Stereo)

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 10, Chris Christie 7, Obama 6, Jon Huntsman 5, New Hampshire 5, New Jersey 4, Washington 3, Lincoln 3, John Boehner 2, Sandinistas 2, John Mccain 2, George W. Bush 2, Nicaragua 2, Miami 2, Priority 2, Alabama 2, Yang 1, Ronald Reagan 1, Cleaver 1, Mike Lee 1
Network CSPAN
Duration 01:06:00
Rating TV-MA
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel v24
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 12/2/2013